TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] ARRL Reviews

To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] ARRL Reviews
From: Kim Elmore <cw_de_n5op@sbcglobal.net>
Reply-to: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 08:38:55 -0500
List-post: <tentec@contesting.com">mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
Perfect!  Absolutely perfect. Kudos to you, good Sir!

Kim N5OP

At 05:59 AM 9/8/2011, you wrote:
>I offer three personal observations on the new radio - receiver list debate:
>
>         1)   As new radios come to market, they may (should) be
>         expected to perform better than older models.   This
>         sort of quality attrition happens in most all fields of
>         endeavor.  New models outpace older ones.   But...
>
>         2)  No matter how much better a new radio is compared to
>         your old rig, ... your old radio does not suddenly start
>         performing worse.  It is still the radio it always was.
>
>         3)  These receiver rankings are sorted only by close-in
>         third order intercept specifications.   Some of the lower
>         rated radios appear to have superior or equivalent ratings
>         on other specs.
>
>
>Therefore,  I don't feel bad that my Omni VII was once rated one of the
>best receivers when it was released in '07, but has fallen a couple of
>places on these receiver rating lists.   It performs the same today as
>it did back then.   I have not lost any ground, nor have I been set
>back, just because the Eagle, or the TX-590s  have better close-in third
>order intercept specifications.   I expect my new TX-590s to have better
>numbers... as does the new TT Eagle.   My Omni VII has not lost any
>ground - the others just pushed the envelope out a little farther, but
>the Omni VII is just as good as it always was.   Same for the Orion II
>and other rigs.    No one took a step backward.
>
>I suspect this take could explain why so many Collins owners continue to
>exhibit tremendous pride and experience such enjoyment with those
>vintage rigs.   They are the same great radios they always were, despite
>the fact newer, improved radios have come along.
>
>Besides, these receiver test charts are of limited utility as they are
>sorted for one, albeit important, factor.  But, this overlooks, and
>overshadows, the fact some of the "lesser" radios have superior figures
>and better specifications in other categories.   They may also have
>other features you might prefer.   Therefore, one needs to look at ALL
>the specifications before making a purchase decision, or before one
>decides his rig has been rendered obsolete.
>
>Therefore, I am not losing any sleep over the rating my rig currently
>has.  I plan on shamelessly enjoying my Omni VII for a very long time -
>without worry the new Eagle has a superior close-
>in-third-order-intercept score.   The Omni VII works as well as it did
>when I purchased it a couple years back.
>
>Besides, I figure I have a limited budget, and good enough is just
>that... good enough.
>
>This is just MY take, anyway... your mileage may differ for various
>multiple reasons.
>
>------------------
>Happy Trails.
>
>=======================  Richards / K8JHR  =========================
>
>On 9/2/2011 23:49, Ron Castro wrote:
> > How true!  There is no scientific correlation between numbers published on
> > the page of a magazine and what is actually coming out of your speaker or
> > headphones.  If they correct the numbers it won't improve the 
> performance of
> > your radio at all.
>_______________________________________________
>TenTec mailing list
>TenTec@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>